Gun Review: Walther CCP

I love the Heckler & Koch P7, as it offers so many engineering features to geek out over. Some of those features appeared on a handgun for the first time with the P7, only to become ubiquitous thereafter (3-dot sights, for example*). A few of those great features have never been reproduced on another pistol. One of them is the gas-piston delayed blowback system, which hasn’t seen use again until the Walther CCP here** and its resurrection is a big reason why I was so excited to get my hands on this new Walther Concealed Carry Pistol. Does it deliver on Walther’s promises of soft recoil and easy slide manipulation? . . .

First, a big thanks to my usual FFL, Best Buy Surplus, for loaning me this new CCP from their stock. These are still pretty freaking hard to find, but Bill at BBS has been in this game for a long time and has an easier time getting those “allocated” items like PMR-30s, VP9s, G42s, CCPs, etc etc than most. When a brand new firearm comes out, he’s got it. There’s only a few CCPs there now, so if you’re in the market for that or anything else, call them up. And do call (509.535.5375), as the TTAG/JeremyS/Locals-Only pricing is only available over the phone or in-person (they’re in Spokane).

On The Range
Normally this is the last category but let’s do overall shooting impressions up top here and break it down later.

Walther tends to make a good barrel and an accurate pistol, and the CCP is certainly no exception on the range. You’d expect a fixed barrel to be slightly more accurate than a tilting or otherwise moving barrel, and it’s probably responsible for some of my steel target-ringing success with the CCP. Considering the pistol’s relatively small size and its sub-par trigger, I was actually quite surprised how well I shot it.

Some of this is also due to the action. Yes, it’s true, the so-called “SOFTCOIL” gas-delayed (because “gas retarded” as HK used to say isn’t PC these days) blowback system does actually make for a fairly soft-shooting pistol. At least considering its small size and relatively light weight, the gun is a soft shooter with less muzzle flip and felt recoil than most of its peers. Even with +P ammo, it was easy to control and comfortable to shoot.

CLICK ANY PHOTO TO ENLARGE

With the striker released, the slide is among the easiest to rack of any centerfire pistol. This will be excellent for any folks with less grip and/or arm strength. With the striker cocked, however, there’s a distinct “bump” that the slide has to pop over while moving rearwards. Likely something in the trigger bar or maybe the firing pin block, etc, but regardless of what actually causes it, it makes the slide harder to rack if you’re doing it slowly. Rack it with purpose and you really don’t notice that bump. The two CCPs I had access to both did this, and both only with the striker cocked.

I found the grip circumference to be a little small for my large hands, as the fingers of my strong hand wrapped so far around the grip that I didn’t have a good place to put my support hand. After shooting it for a while, though, I started to get used to it and it became less and less of an issue for me. It certainly didn’t affect accuracy. For anyone with smaller hands than me (anyone on the small side of a men’s large on down) it’s going to be great, though. This combined with the easy-to-manipulate slide and the relatively soft recoil will make it an excellent pistol for ladies and smaller folks in general.

My only real on-the-range CCP gripe is the trigger. Ugh. I hope the aftermarket addresses this, because Walther has really shot itself in the foot (metaphorically speaking) here on what is otherwise a really solid little pistol. Well, the takedown process is tragic also, but I’ll kvetch about that later and I don’t personally think it’s as important as the trigger.

Oh, the trigger. On a handgun made for concealed carry I truly do not mind a long, heavy trigger. In fact, I chose the Beretta Nano as my EDC due in part to the fact that it has a long, heavy trigger. But, the Nano has no safety. If you put a manual safety on a pistol, you don’t need a painfully long trigger pull. Of course, the length of the CCP trigger’s pull is the least of its worries, but more on this later.

In The Box

The CCP comes with some pretty good kit inside of the plastic clamshell box. In addition to the pistol itself, you’ll find the usual owner’s manual, NSSF safety card, warranty card, Walther advertisement flyer, and gun lock. The CCP sits in a form-fitting cutout in the foam liner with a chamber flag and a magazine installed. A second magazine can be found in its own cutout, which also holds a baggie of tools and spare parts. These include a brass brush for the gas chamber, a Torx wrench for drift adjusting the rear sight, a hex wrench for removing the front sight, two spare front sights of different heights, a pin to punch out the gas piston’s roll pin, and a takedown tool that may or may not work for field stripping your CCP.

Build
A steel slide in Cerakote black or a satin-finished stainless steel slide sits atop a polymer frame. The frame is easily one of the nicest polymer pistol frames I have ever seen or felt. Everything about it screams quality, from scarcely visible mold lines to the texture, feel, cleanness, sharpness, uniformity, stiffness, etc. Apart from the area of the grip that has all of the stippling, you could easily mistake this frame for aluminum. It’s just so flat and hard and solid.

Likewise, the machining on the slide is very good, inside and out. Very few tool or machining marks. It looks like a lot of excess material was removed from inside of the slide to reduce weight, and it was all done very cleanly.

I’m sure some folks will complain that the underside of the slide wasn’t Cerakoted other than overspray, but I don’t really care. You can always get the stainless slide.

The CCP has no slide rails, instead using the fixed barrel and a frame hook on the rear to keep the slide on the frame. No rails doesn’t mean no steel in the frame, though, and the steel inserts are actually really big and burly, the front part holding the barrel in place and housing the gas cylinder. Gas cylinder?

How It Works
What H&K used to call a “gas retardation system” is now SOFTCOIL™ gas-delayed blowback technology. I admit I always felt weird about owning something German with a built-in gas chamber, so am happy to report that Walther refers to theirs as a gas cylinder. Nevertheless, this aspect of the P7’s design lives on as the CCP’s system for delaying an otherwise straight blowback action is functionally identical.

A small port lives in the bottom of the barrel just in front of the chamber:

Upon firing, pressure is high for as long as the bullet is in the barrel. That pressure goes down this port and into the gas cylinder below…

…where it impedes the rearward motion of the gas piston and attempts to prevent it from going deeper into the cylinder.

As the piston is connected to the front of the slide, preventing the piston from moving rearwards means preventing the slide from moving rearwards. When the bullet leaves the barrel, pressure drops and the slide is able to cycle. Thus, without any sort of barrel/slide locking mechanism, this system allows for delaying the blowback action until pressure has dropped to safe levels.

This is an old diagram of the HK P7, but it’s functionally the same on the CCP:

The end result is a blowback action that is very unique in its lightweight slide and light power recoil spring. Despite the light slide and light spring, though, you should still be in the clear for running +P ammo as the greater the pressure generated, the harder the gas piston should prevent the slide from cycling. Indeed, the owner’s manual has the usual blurb about +P being acceptable (when it’s acceptable for a firearm model at all, that is) with the caveat that it tends to increase wear and tear.

Other than this there is nothing particularly notable about the functional design of the CCP. It’s otherwise a fairly standard blowback-operated pistol with the recoil spring around a fixed barrel. It’s striker-fired — single action, meaning the slide must reciprocate to cock the striker — with a polymer frame.

Field Strip
For those who demand a pistol that can be broken down rapidly in the field with no tools, the CCP isn’t your gun. I know this is going to strike it off the list for a lot of you and may affect CCP sales, so I really don’t know what Walther was thinking. Unless this part was designed by Walther’s legal counsel and not its engineers.

To get your CCP looking like the one above, you’re going to have to push the plug on the rear of the slide inwards. Now, this is really common on blowback-operated pistols as a lot of them use a slide plug to hold the rear of the slide down onto the frame. See that hook on the back of the frame in the pic above? The plug hooks onto it and you can’t lift the slide up off the frame unless the plug gets pushed in far enough to clear the grasp of that hook. Like the $99 Cobra I checked out.

Unlike the Cobra and every other pistol I’ve seen with a slide plug, however, the CCP has a locking tab on its plug. That’s the little silver part on the top of the plug seen in the photo above. It’s a hook itself, and it hooks onto the top of the frame hook. Presumably this is to prevent the plug from moving inwards when you don’t want it to, but I’ve never heard of this happening on any other pistol ever. The plug is under constant, rearwards spring tension and shouldn’t be subjected to forwards force such that it could slide off the frame hook with or without its own safety hook. Lawyers?

Anyway, the special plastic tool that ships with the CCP has a little “tooth” on the top that’s supposed to lift up on that safety hook while you use the tool to press the plug into the slide. Mine didn’t work. It looked like the tooth was partially broken off from the factory, which seems reasonable as the hook on my CCP took concerted effort to lift. There was simply no physical way it was going to happen with that tool. ‘Luckily,’ the owner’s manual says you can use a screwdriver or other implement.

Simply push that tab hook upwards to clear it off the frame hook’s top hook, then push the entire plug into the slide far enough to clear the frame hook. Oh and then you need to pull back on the slide to bring the extractor out of the extractor notch. With your third hand, lift the rear of the slide upwards until the plug has cleared the hook. Now you can relax, and the slide will slip right off the front of the frame without a hitch and with a sharp reduction in swearing.

After doing it a bunch of times, it isn’t actually that difficult and I can accomplish it in 6 to 20 seconds depending on whether I mess up once or not (the plug can rotate and lock up). My other charitable comment is that a blowback action should not require cleaning for the purposes of reliable function as often as a pistol with a locking mechanism.

Glass half full thoughts or not, for a modern pistol, the takedown process is absurd. Heck, the P7 was designed in 1976 and you can see in my video above just how easy that gun is to field strip. Push a thumb button that releases the frame’s grip on the slide, then lift the slide up and off the front.

Controls
A manual safety graces the left side of the CCP’s frame. It’s in a good location and is intuitive and easy to swipe off with your thumb. Unfortunately I think it’s a little too easy to engage, and I wish it had a more solid detent, especially in the “off” position. Strengthening both detents wouldn’t be a bad idea.

A thumb button-style magazine release is located on the left side as well, but this can be reversed to the other side for lefties.

I like the small slide stop lever, but found myself having the same issue with it that I had on the PPQ. Walther happens to put the stop exactly where I like to put my strong hand thumb, and riding the stop means the slide sometimes doesn’t lock back on empty for me. Most shooters probably won’t experience the same issue. When I kept my thumb away, the slide locked back just fine.

Ergos
Walther nailed it again here. This stippling texture, which you’ll find on the PPQ and others, is awesome. I love it. The shape of the grip is superb and all of the bumps and grooves and whatnot work together to make for top tier comfort along with excellent control.

Now the grip diameter itself was a bit small for me, and this is the rare pistol where I actually desired swappable backstraps. I would have shot it better with a fuller grip, as the fingers of my strong hand wrapped around the grip far enough that I wasn’t really left with anywhere to put my weak hand. That is, I had a hard time making contact with the frame with my left hand. At first this was also causing issues with my left thumb as I couldn’t find a home for it either. Eventually, I adapted my grip to the size and got my support hand in a place in which it stayed still.

Overall, a non-issue once I got used to the pistol for a while and it would be a huge plus for anyone with smaller hands.

The relatively soft recoil, comfortable trigger shape, and easy-to-manipulate slide all contribute to solid shooting ergonomics. The recoil actually softened up for me after firing a few magazines, as I think some carbon buildup on the gas piston and in the gas cylinder help it seal up better.

Magazines
The CCP ships with a pair of 8-round, stainless steel magazines. They’re single stack and the quality is nice. The magwell molded into the frame is pretty slick:

Of course, the contouring and ribbing and such makes me curious if Walther couldn’t have fit a staggered-round magazine into a frame of the same outside width.

Trigger
On the plus side, the shape and width of the CCP’s trigger is quite nice. I’ll take the lack of a trigger blade “safety” thing any day.

Unfortunately any words of praise take a hard stop right there. The trigger pull itself is long, spongy, gritty, and squeaky. I do believe this is the first time I’ve called a trigger “squeaky,” but I can’t think of another way to describe the halting nature of the friction experienced during the trigger pull. It’s sort of like pressing two different materials against each other that slide decently well when moving fast but stick a bit when moving slow. It sort of jerks and squeaks as it slips and sticks, slips and sticks during the pull. In fact it literally, audibly squeaks a little. It’s also slightly gritty. And generally just spongy and squishy feeling.

Maybe you’re familiar with coefficient of static friction vs. coefficient of kinetic friction. If so, combined with the “squeaky” description above, you’ll understand why I have a hard time telling you what the trigger pull weight on the CCP is. Walther claims 5.5 lbs, and I can sometimes get my gauge to read close to that if I pull the trigger relatively quickly. If I pull it slowly I’ll get readings up to nearly 8 lbs. As best as I can tell, the honest trigger pull weight on my sample with a consistent, smooth pull of a normal speed is ~6.5 lbs. Not bad.

The break itself isn’t the worst, but it’s a bit squishy. There’s really no audible or tactile reset of which to speak, and the trigger must be let out all the way for it to reset. When I first started shooting the CCP, there were a few times where I failed to release all trigger finger weight from the trigger and pulled it again, only to find it hadn’t reset. This stopped once I got used to it, but the solution is basically mandatory trigger slapping (lifting one’s finger completely off the trigger blade and then coming back onto it instead of “riding the reset”).

Actually, the trigger ruined my normally-decent trigger pull fundamentals. I had to slap the trigger to ensure reset, and I had to jerk it rapidly through the entire pull length to scare the squeak out of it and trick it into being smooth.

Somehow, despite this, I shot the dang thing really well and I still like the pistol a lot. I admit to becoming more and more of a trigger snob over the last few years, and I know a lot of people won’t think twice about the CCP’s bang switch. It works, it feels nice on your finger, and it’s safe. The most important thing is training and getting used to it, and for a self defense pistol the CCP’s trigger is very adequate.

If the gun didn’t have a manual safety I probably wouldn’t complain so much, but if you give it a safety, give it a good trigger. Give it the PPQ’s trigger. Heck, the PPQ has the PPQ’s trigger and it doesn’t even have a safety.

Sights
Sights are polymer, of the 3-white-dot variety. Point of impact was dead-on for me from the factory, but Walther ships the pistol with two additional front sight blades so you can install a shorter or taller one to adjust for elevation. Inside the base of the rear sight is a small bolt or set screw, and turning it with the included Torx wrench will drift the sight left or right to adjust for windage. Pretty slick.

The CCP’s sights were quick and easy to pick up. They’re compatible in size with the P99, PPQ, and PPS sights so there are already tritium night sights, target sights, and other options available on the market.

Accuracy
Groups at 15 yards from a sandbag rest would have been better if the trigger were better. Still, I can’t entirely explain the vertical stringing that I saw with most of the following ammo brands. I didn’t seem to experience that on the range.

Perhaps I was having an off day, and I did forget to bring my LaserMax Micro to shoot a group while taking the human element of sight alignment out of it. May have to revisit this later, as I do feel the CCP is more accurate than the norm and should have turned in tighter groups.

Reliability
I put 300 rounds through this CCP straight as it came out of the box, and had only a couple of hiccups. Three times I had a stovepipe on the last round in the magazine. Were I not always riding the slide stop and the slide actually locked back on empty like it should have, I doubt these few ejection hiccups would have happened at all.

There were also two failures to feed during my first range session. I chalk this up to two primary factors. First, I was shooting reloads and they can sometimes be a bit loose on their dimensional specs. I’ve definitely had some pistols with particularly tight chambers that hated the reloads but ran factory ammo without a hitch. So I’m not really blaming the CCP for this.

However, the second factor is that relatively soft recoil spring. Less spring power means the slide returns forwards more slowly and with less force behind it. Visually I couldn’t determine that these rounds were out of spec and they dropped into the chamber fine for me manually. The very smallest bump to the back of the slide got both of them to chamber easily at the moment the stoppage actually occurred. I’m quite confident that were a stronger spring used — assuming the slide still cycled fully rearwards with it, of course — these stoppages would not have happened.

That said, it would have a negative affect on how easily the CCP’s slide can be manipulated and I had zero issues with any factory ammo, including two brands of hollow points. Both of those were +P, and the CCP felt great shooting them.

Conclusions
Despite ragging on the trigger and the required takedown tool, I really like the CCP and I think Walther probably has — and should have — a successful seller on its hands. My top 9mm-or-larger recommendation for most members of the fairer sex or anyone with smaller hands has historically been the Ruger SR9 (and/or SR9C or 9E), but I think that may now switch to the CCP. The size of the grip, the ease of manipulating the slide, and the soft recoil make it a great choice in this case. Any centerfire caliber? Walther’s PK380 wins for an easy to control, comfortable, easy to manipulate pistol with a small circumference grip.

I was accurate and confident with the CCP on the range. It outshoots its size category.

From everything I saw of my production CCP, quality is top notch. It’s a really nice pistol and I expect it to prove reliable and accurate for people. I’ve already seen a couple horror stories on the Walther forum of what were allegedly “leaked,” pre-production guns with appalling QC, but judging by the two legit, distributor-shipped, production CCPs I saw at my FFL I think this will be a good little gat. I’d EDC the CCP reviewed here without hesitation.

It’s larger and heavier than my Nano, but it’s still solidly within the concealed carry competitive market. It feels slim and nimble in the hand like the Shield, XDs, LC9s, P983, and other single stack 9s, but it’s actually a bit bigger by the numbers. In fact, it’s the exact same width (based on manufacturer stats) as a GLOCK 19, but it’s slightly taller. It’s a tad shorter in length than the G19 and 1.4 ounces lighter. Also from Walther and overlooked by many, the PPS is a top notch CCW choice. It’s smaller than the CCP here in every dimension and is a bit lighter as well.

Accuracy: * * * * *
Well above the norm for a compact or sub-compact pistol. My sandbag results were average, but the CCP outshines on the range.

Ergonomics: * * * * *
Grip shape and texture are amazing. A bit small for me at first, but most people have smaller hands and I warmed up to it pretty quickly. Mag release and safety are in great locations, and most folks will really like the location of the slide stop as well. The slide is easy to manipulate.

Reliability: * * * *
It wasn’t perfect for me with reloads, although it did run a couple hundred without complaint, and it was perfect with all factory ammo.

Trigger: * *
I’ve played with a lot worse triggers, so the CCP comes in one star under average here. I’d say the average trigger in this category is just a bit better than the CCP’s.

Customize This: * * *
Average. Sights are easy to swap out, and the mag release can be moved from one side to the other. No swappable grip panels and no aftermarket “tuning” at this time prevent a better score.

Overall: * * * 1/2
This would definitely be a 4+ star pistol with a better trigger and easier takedown. One more demerit for the fact that it’s thicker and taller than most of its single-stack 9mm peers. It still easily comes in above average for me due to being a near-ideal 9mm for a lady, youngster, or really anybody with smaller hands and/or less strength than it takes to confidently rack the slide on a lot of pistols. These features will be enjoyed by anyone, though. Quality is really high, and it’s a great shooter. Man, if only the trigger were like the PPQ’s I’d happily give it a very solid 4-star rating despite the takedown. I’m still bullish on it, and if you aren’t a trigger snob you should definitely consider it for CCW.

–//–

* I’m pretty sure HK invented the 3-dot, and I think it appeared on the P7 first. The P9 was sort of there with 3 rectangles but that doesn’t count, right?** So the South African Vektor CP1 borrowed an identical mechanism but the gun was not a commercial success and there are maybe a thousand of ’em in the U.S. The Steyr GB is also a gas retarded blowback system but it seals around the barrel instead of using a separate piston and cylinder.

–//–

HK P7 Comparison Notes & Photos

The P7’s frame right above the trigger guard was known for getting pretty dang hot — due to the hot combustion gasses entering the gas piston — when shooting somewhat rapidly. Subsequent iterations of the P7, beginning with the P7M8, included a heat shield there so you wouldn’t burn your trigger finger. In my experience this is slightly blown out of proportion, as you really have to dump a decent amount of ammo through it in fairly short order and then hold your finger on the frame in that spot to hurt yourself, but if I shot this in IPSC or other competition I’m sure it would have happened by now.

Anyway, the CCP didn’t have that issue at all. The polymer frame insulates the shooter from the heat generated by the gas system, and the large metal block seems to soak it up and then transfer it upwards towards the barrel. Eventually I found the sides of the slide on either side of that block were getting toasty, but they never got more than noticeably warm.

The P7’s frame isn’t longer, but thanks to a magazine that inserts in a very vertical fashion — it’s at a steeper angle than the grip — it does manage to fit a longer barrel:

P7 TOP, CCP BOTTOM

The P7 definitely has a lower bore axis. Easily one of the lowest out there, actually.

P7 TOP, CCP BOTTOM

The P7’s slide is just slightly longer, but it’s shorter vertically. The gas piston is longer and designed a bit differently.

CCP TOP, P7 BOTTOM

CCP TOP, P7 BOTTOM

CCP TOP, P7 BOTTOM

One sweet feature on the P7 — and I think in the next week or so I’m going to write up a “why the P7 is the coolest pistol ever” article — that isn’t found on the CCP (or any other pistol I know of?) is the fluted chamber:

These flutes allow combustion gasses to float the brass out of the chamber air hockey style. Because of this, the P7 will run reliably with a broken extractor or with no extractor at all. I did not remove the CCP’s extractor to see how it fares.

Jeremy, how does this compare to the 4″ XDS varriants out there? Looking at a 9mm for the missus and this may have just jumped to the top of my list. You mentioned it has similar dimensions to a G19 how would you say it compares to that? I assume the ergo’s are better on the Walther?

Ergos are amazing and this would certainly fit the missus’ hands better. XDs is fine on the grip but this would be a huge leap over the G19 for her and is still going to be more comfortable and I think smaller circumference than the XDs. The slide is definitely easier to rack (primarily w/ the striker decocked) than either. XDs would win for trigger quality followed by the G19, followed by the CCP which feels like a longer, spongier version of a GLOCK trigger. Unless she’s shot a bunch of other pistols, though, she’d think this trigger was totally fine. Overall I’d say it’s much easier to use and probably shoots even softer and more controllably than a G19 and definitely softer than an XDs. Looks a lot nicer than a G19, which isn’t particularly appealing to anybody who values form on any scale approaching how they value function. I think it’s a really solid 9mm choice, as long as you aren’t forgetting about ease of takedown and whether that’s going to matter for the wife or not or if you’re the only one who’s going to be doing that stuff anyway, etc.

I imagine any gun I buy for her will be a lot like her car as far as maintenance goes, ie “its dirty, go wash it” or “the oil change light came on last week, take it to the guy” So with that in mind I dont have any fundamental problem with a gun that needs tools to take down, especially when they are simple tools like a screwdriver. I havent changed out the guide rod on my Springfield Loaded yet so I already need allen wrenches to get that one apart, no big deal.

Thanks for an awesome review, I will definitely keep this one in mind.

You’re killing me, I have to say you’re lucky. My bride tells me the light’s been on a while when I notice it and ask her, otherwise I’d never hear about it, and it could be carrying 200 lbs of dirt before she’d mention it.

Do keep in mind that this is an explicit safety gun, so she needs to deal with that. XD is pseudo-DAO with implicit grip safety. Also, reliability is in question for me. I’d wait a couple of years, see if they change something with the recoil spring.

On the upside, at least they returned to normal mag release. I really hate the innovative release on P99.

My wife doesn’t like our XD, says it’s too tough to rack if needed. In this sense CCP is probably a step forward. But XD was flawless with any ammo.

Just as your average golfer thinks he is one putter away from being Bobby Jones, there are a lot of shooters who think they are one custom trigger away from being Jerry Mculek. I am sure that you will be able to hit the target just fine with the stock trigger and your success at hitting the target at 15 yards demonstrates this quite well. A self-defense pistol does not need a competition trigger to do its job. Under the adrenaline rush you won’t notice it anyway.

Yeah but when a factory GLOCK trigger is looking like a luxury Hawaiian vacation in comparison you know something has gone awry. Especially when it’s coming from the company that puts the best striker-fired trigger on the market into its PPQ.

Time for some good nurtured ribbing. When the “best trigger in a striker fired pistol” isn’t as smooth as the trigger in my Springfield MILSPEC I can;t get worked up over any of the triggers in my plastic wunderwaffens.

Sure. It isn’t a 1911 although the PPQ’s trigger is undoubtedly better than a lot of 1911 triggers I’ve played with. It also isn’t as good as many/most 1911 triggers I’ve pulled. I really should have said “…in a polymer, striker-fired…” as there just might be metal-framed, striker-fired pistols with better triggers. Heck, my P7 may be one of them.

The CCP and PPQ are different guns for different uses and probably for a different type of person.

The PPQ is probably better for the experienced shooter who will be more confident with a gun having a lighter, shorter trigger and no manual safety. More experienced shooters will also be the ones to be more able to take advantage of the PPQ’s trigger.

I’d suspect that the long, spongy trigger is by design, at least in part. Walther’s previous thin, compact design, the PPS, has, in my opinion, a rather spongy and gritty trigger and will never be mistaken for a race gun. However, it doesn’t really impact practical accuracy for offhand shooting significantly.

I also think the CCP was likely designed as a gun for people that aren’t gun enthusiasts, so the trigger that requires a deliberate pull and the manual safety might be selling points for people that might be a little uncomfortable carrying a pistol with a lighter trigger and lacking a manual safety.

Long and heavy is great for a self defense piece. But there’s no reason for it to be gritty, spongy, squeaky, and vague. It could long & heavy but be consistent and smooth with a consistent and crisp break, like a new production Ruger LC9 or a Beretta Nano (which also adds a solid reset). …and it should be. Walther’s capable of making a good trigger.

Jeremy, Walther can indeed design a good trigger. In my opinion, the P99, PPQ, and PPX all have very good to excellent triggers. On the other hand, I’d rate the PPS’s trigger (for range accuracy purposes) as just so-so. Given this, I’m speculating, and it is pure speculation on my part, that Walther intentionally makes the triggers for their CCW-targeted models a little less precise.

Additionally, while long and heavy is the traditional way to ensure deliberate trigger actuation, I can see why Walther might have chosen to go another route with the CCP. With the CCP having been designed to have less recoil and an easier to manipulate slide that would make this pistol attractive to those with below average hand strength, I can see how a spongy and gritty trigger could have been chosen over simply making the trigger pull heavier.

Again, I’m just thinking out loud. Thank you for putting together a detailed and honest review. I much prefer reading reviews like yours over the fluff pieces that are all to common in gun magazines. You’ve actually made me curious about just how spongy and gritty the CCP’s trigger is.

Ummmm. Glock triggers stink. I know that’s sacrilage to some, but a lot of people appear to agree with me. If they didn’t there wouldn’t be such a huge aftermarket of third party trigger parts for the Glock. Everyone would just keep the trigger that came in it.

Yeah. That’s exactly the point of my comment. Glock triggers are marginal yet are worlds better than the CCP’s trigger. By making that comparison I’m not saying Glock triggers are good, I’m saying that CCP triggers are freaking abysmal.

I don’t really know anything about it that isn’t in Wikipedia, but yeah. Apparently 2,000 made it to the U.S. but they were all recalled and the company issued cash money in return, so the only ones that remain are ones people chose to keep despite the recall (just like the R51, Caracal, etc).

“If you recommend this piece for people with hand issues how do you square the complicated and tool requiring take down for those same people?”

I’d say that 1) I’m not suggesting small hands or less grip strength than your average man qualifies as “hand issues” and 2) I’m not suggesting that those with small hands or less grip strength than your average man are of diminished mental capacity either 😉 . A complicated take down doesn’t necessarily mean it’s physically difficult (requires particular strength). …BUT… yes, I admit that it’s a bit hard to reconcile those two things and you’re right to point it out. The gun itself is very easy to grip, control, fire, and manipulate for actual shooting use. The take down is crappy because it’s complicated, but it still doesn’t require as much strength as just racking the slide on a lot of pistols, so I still think it’ll be overall easier for a lot of folks. Even people with small hands can hold a small screwdriver 😉

The PPS isn’t far from being a compact PPQ. The trigger is much closer and it’s functionally much closer. Super slim and flat pretty much precludes the rounded, sculpted grip on the PPQ, CCP, PPX, etc but I’d say the PPS is pretty dang close to a sub-compact PPQ in practice.

Great review and good pictures. How did the chamber entrance look on these two pistols? Pictures of early pistols that I’ve seen show some rough, factory hand filing or grinding there along with ugly marks left by tool slippage. I’m hoping Walther gets that aspect sorted quickly.

Polymer frame pistols usually just have tiny rail nubbins that won’t do anything at all for keeping stuff out of the insides. More important is the gap between the slide and the frame, and the CCP’s is actually pretty snug in this regard. Definitely quite a bit tighter than a GLOCK and you can’t see straight through the gun to what’s on the other side like a GLOCK and many other competitors haha. You can get a feel for it in some of the photos above. Additionally, since there’s no locking mechanism and no rails the lint and debris and whatever else should have much less of a potential effect on function.

…the CCP could have a solid plug back there that seals up the back of the slide but still not have the annoying locking tab 😉 …

I find it curious that the CCP is exactly the same width and almost precisely the same weight as my .45ACP Glock G36, which has a decent trigger and simple take-down. I carry it when the G30S seems a bit too wide or heavy for the clothing and/or carry method. (I’m a fan of the PPQ and sometimes carry it.)

To be fair, not all manufacturers measure in the same way. Some do the widest part of only the slide or frame, and some do the extreme widest part meaning on top of a control. If Walther is measuring from the farthest protrusion on the right side to the outside of the safety lever but GLOCK is measuring the slide or frame width it could be a bit deceiving. The CCP does absolutely look and feel thinner. Unfortunately I didn’t measure it myself to see what the actual slide width and frame width are. If those are like 0.95″ and the safety sticking out brings it up to 1.18″, it’s still going to carry like a 0.95″ gun whereas a GLOCK, being a nice little box, is what it is 😉

…this is total conjecture, BTW. I’ll try to check it out again and measure shortly. But my perception of it was that it’s a skinny gun and it feels and handles like a skinny gun, so when I was adding the stats to the end of the review here I was surprised to see 1.18″ on Walther’s website.

I just field stripped it for the first time using a small blunt Phillips screw driver and was surprised as to how easy it was if you follow the directions. I have seen a few forget to strike it out and then have a tough time. Some have rotated the striker catch lock while depressing and have to go searching for the striker spring.

I don’t own nor have I used any AR’s or anything that would prepare me for this take down procedure. First time took a couple of minutes(2) to figure out and go “oh” and next time it will be a breeze. The only challenge was reassembling it at the point you have to line up the piston rod with its receiver. So reassembly took 30 seconds for my first time.

As Jeremy Notes, and I try to explain farther below, Glock and Walther do not measure width the same way.

Glocks are very blocky, and don’t vary much in width across the pistol. The widths quoted on Walther’s website and materials is the Maximum width, which is typically at the slide-lock lever or in the case of the CCP, probably the safety. The rest of the pistol is much thinner, and due to the non-blocky slide countours, will also carry better than a Glock of equal width (although the CCP’s actual slide/frame width is probably a lot thinner).

Why does no review put the disclaimer that this pistol is manufactured by Umerex, Walther’s overlord air soft company. I have never had a hiccup with my PPQ, P99 or PPS. But by sweet baby jesus have I had problems with my PK380, and P22. Both of those are made by Umerex and have the same unfinished internals as the CCP. No carry pistol should ever malfunction, unless its ammo, even during a “break in period”. These are guns to defend your life with, not some crappy airsoft tooled junk.

I’m not convinced it’s possible to know what parts were made where. The Cologne proof mark means it was proofed there but doesn’t necessarily mean it was manufactured there or how much or what was manufactured there. Maybe it was only the frame. If so, it was a good choice because it’s exceptional. I understand the sentiment you’re expressing but also don’t necessarily give credence to it. Just because Umarex has been a manufacturer primarily of air guns in the past doesn’t mean they can’t competently make top-quality components for a firearm. Some of the nicest 1911s in WWII came from companies that had never made anything gun-like ever before, like sewing machine, typewriter, and sign/signaling companies. The .22’s that stink and have problems usually stink and have problems because they’re made of zinc alloy, not necessary because of who made them of zinc alloy. That’s a decision that Walther and/or Umarex — they’re the same company now — made on purpose. Walther could have cast it out of zinc alloy in its factory if it wanted to and the guns would still stink.

In the case of the CCPs I’ve seen, the quality is top notch. I don’t consider the slide “unfinished” just because it wasn’t Cerakoted inside, although I’m sure plenty of folks who care deeply about aesthetics will disagree. CZ has never polycoated the inside of the slide and frame where you can’t see either, and it’s certainly no sign of poor quality. People still justify spending hundreds more on a Sig, though, because it does get painted inside. Totally subjective. What’s important is machining quality and apparent metal quality, assembly, etc, and from what I can see and tell the CCP I shot is as good as anything. Maybe Umarex casts the cast parts and then Walther machines and assembles? Who the heck knows.

You’d have to put the same disclaimer on every Springer with a frame cast in Brazil just ‘cuz it’s Brazilian so it must be lower quality or something, or any gun with a MIM part heck it probably was MIM’d by Taurus so it’s basically a Taurus just like this CCP is apparently an airsoft gun because Umarex, the company that owns Walther, proofed it.

– TakeDown style is borrowed from “liliput” of 1920’s with a mechanical blockage giving
no way if mainspring failure happens. The “Hard to disengage” tip protruding backwards
at slide back, is for this purpose.

– Drop Safety holds the gun at “Ready to Fire” mode transmitting the “Hold Cocked”
mission from sear to striker block, but in case of a stepped downhill drop, it is that safety
block’s turn to release the striker and the gun discharges.

– GasBrake piston has smaller friction area and rougher moving tolerances as compared
to P7 and manual retraction is easier and initial velocıty is lesser.

You were probably getting vertical strings on your targets from jerking the trigger. If you’ve got a good squeeze otherwise, a hard jerk (to get the smoother pull you wrote about) can cause the muzzle to dip a bit.

Thanks for the review. I felt this contest had reduced the quality of reviews here, bit this was good. I was considering a S&W Shield because I want single stack 9mm with a safety and it seemed like the only game in town. I’ve got another gun on my list.

I was basically jerking the trigger on the range because it actually improved my results. That certainly isn’t how I was shooting on a sandbag rest. The trigger came back as slowly as physically possible until I was surprised by the gunshot. Every last time.

The copy I shot didn’t have that bad of a trigger, at least as good as my PPS and I couldn’t make it stovepipe. I shot several mags through it with a virtual dead fish grip. No malfunctions. Good review.

Jeremy, I’ve been reading TTAG for a few years now and it’s awesome watching your reviews develop over time. They’re really well written and thought out as well as balanced. You make your opinion known without pretense and I always learn something. Keep it up. This CCP looks like a great offering from Walther at a reasonable price.

With “single-stack” and “8-rounds” I was hooked! The XDs and Shield each have 7 rounds and an eighth seemed like a great plan. I only IWB carry, anyway.

Strike 1: Darn that thumb safety! Nope, not for me.
Strike 2: 1.18″ is the same width of a Glock 19. Why bother with 8 rounds when I can have 15 in the exact same width gun? Nope, not for me.
Strike 3: Two strikes is bad enough, why bother with more…

1.18″ is the width of the Glock frame/slide across the ENTIRE pistol, which is rather square.
1.18″ width on the CCP is at the widest point (I think it’s the safety). The entire rest of the slide/frame is quite a bit thinner, and more contoured.

Walther quotes the width of the PPQ at 1.3″, but that pistol, despite being larger than a G19 in every dimension (on paper), carries similar to one due to the contours and similar slide/frame width.

I submitted a review of the CCP to TTAG on Dec. 26, a week before the review by Jeremy S was posted. Mine was more critical. It appears editorial discretion has been exercised by TTAG folks in favor the subsequent review by Jeremy S. Let me share some of the observations that I made in my review, in case anyone is interested.

The entrance to the chamber on mine, when I received it, looked like it had been to someone’s “custom” shop. There was clear evidence of manual shaping of the chamber opening. There are gouges consistent with some sort of hand filing. And there was additional flaring over a wider area, with a more polished appearance. The irregularity of the interface with the chamber for this additional work seems ad hoc, and inconsistent with something that was planned.

Pictures of this were posted on the Walther Forum on December 19. I gather my pictures are some of those referenced in the above review. I’ll provide a link to one picture:

And yes, the three marks at the top, near the chamber entrance, and the one at 11 o’clock, are evidently additional remnants of improvident use of a hand tool.

I purchased my CCP through a normal retail transaction from an FFL/retailer. I have no reason to describe mine as an “allegedly ‘leaked,’ pre-production gun[]”.

The firearm was quite dirty when I received it. Whether that is because Walther personnel did some firing of the pistol, identified issues and then sent it to the “custom shop” is something only Walther folks can address.

In my review, I discussed a few bobbles in the functioning of my CCP. I’ll leave it at that.

Let me now expand beyond matters contained in my banished review:

When I received the pistol, there were obvious irregularities in the milling of the slide. I did not comment on that in my brief review. The import of those irregularities was not clear to me at the time. They are depicted here:

After seeing some other posts on the Walther Forum, I confirmed that the irregular milling in this area in fact fully penetrated the milled wall, creating a slight hole or crack. I’ve put a piece of paper through it, as depicted in this picture:

That may be a material concern. Why? Well, this irregular milling has created a hole in the wall of a channel that holds a spring. Likely a hole having an acute angle on its perimeter. And at a location where the spring may rub.

Ahhhh…. now we have something additional that merits some thought.

Someone posting on the Walther Forum, under the name “Jeremy S”, first introduced the Walther Forum to the TTAG post. In later discussion of the review on TTAG, that individual notes, “Yeah I did see some of the ridiculous CCP examples on here with file marks, holes, etc. Mentioned it in the review, actually, so readers can be aware of it.”

In response to a question, “Would you write the review the same way now?”, Jeremy S replied in part:

“I did write the review that way. We’re a blog, not a magazine, so it isn’t like I submitted copy two months ago [emoticon with tongue displayed]”

I do not know whether the “Jeremy S” posting on the Walther Forum is the same Jeremy S who wrote this TTAG review.

Had I been posting a review a week later than I originally submitted one, I would have chosen to mention the additional above concerns.

Your review is probably in the reader review submission queue, which is being managed by TTAG’s Managing Editor. Just because I reviewed it does not mean yours won’t be published or isn’t valid. Multiple reviews of the same firearm can be very useful as people can have different experiences and different opinions.

Indeed, in this case, your CCP appears to be a complete and total nightmare. My review would have been completely different had that been the CCP I received, and it probably would have achieved a “1-star + swift kick to the groin” rating. On the Walther Forum (thread here) and on here my impression of your text is that you’re actually angry at me for the review I wrote, wishing instead that my review was based on your experience and the experience of a couple other folks on the Walther Forum who also posted some pretty dang F’d up looking pistols. Sorry. Like I said on the forum there, I went above and beyond ANY other review you will see anywhere — online or certainly in print — by specifically mentioning the couple of horror stories of appalling CCP’s mentioned on the Walther Forum plus the rumor on there that some pre-production guns were “leaked” into distribution channels.

But the bottom line is that I’m reviewing my experience. I looked at two CCPs and shot one. My review is my actual, factual experience. If the review you wrote is publishable, it will be published and you will be vindicated and may rejoice.

Yeah, but then you have to put up with every jackass and his brother telling you how Taurus is garbage all the damn time… The G2 is probably every bit as good a gun as this Walther, but if you buy the Walther, at least you won’t get henpecked at the range… 😉

First, a disclaimer: I have two Taurus pistols, and am generally satisfied with them, so I am not a hater, but I am not a fanboy, either. I looked a a Millennium G2 seriously, but when I field stripped one (I have a very accommodating dealer), and saw the finish of the parts inside, and I felt the extreme rattle between the slide and the frame, I demurred. I ended up with a Kahr CW9, and, later, a Ruger SR9C, instead. Oh, and the Millennium magazines looked cheesy, too.

One of the things I like the most about the 1911 is that I can detail strip a GI model with nothing but a .45 ACP round to pull the grip screws. From there on, the pistol supplies the everything I need.

The Glock can be detail stripped with only a punch; the “Glock Armorer’s Tool” is nothing but a Glock fanboy version of a 3/32nds pin punch. I can make a punch out of a wire coat hanger (or a finishing nail) that will detail-strip a Glock.

But those are “detail stripping” operations – which I do often as a gunsmith. I can field strip either one of those pistols, or nearly any other pistol made in the last 100 years, without any tools. Even the Beretta M9/Model 92, the “Italian Spring Bomb,” can be field stripped without any tools.

Everyone should be able to field strip and clean their pistol in normal usage. It is part of the manual of arms for all military arms that a soldier should be able to field strip his weapon every day, then clean, lubricate and re-assemble it quickly. Every shooting course I’ve been on has expected students to field strip, clean, lube and re-assemble their pistols in good order.

A pistol that cannot be field stripped without a tool? That’s a fundamental disqualification for any pistol I’d own to use (as opposed to a pistol I’d own to collect) right there.

This is definitely a weapon I’ll be watching. I can’t tell you how disappointed I am to hear bad things about the trigger. I have a PPQ and couldn’t be happier with it. Hopefully this will get sorted out in the near future. Thank you very much for the review, I enjoyed it.

I can’t really be sure of the calibration of the kitchen scale that I used, but for the purposes of comparing the weight of one to the weight of the other it should be accurate. The P7’s slide is a touch longer, as is its gas piston. The striker is also a pretty solid piece of machined tool steel whereas the striker in the CCP is a tiny thing that’s basically a hollow cup with a firing pin on one end and I think it’s cast or MIM.

I’ve carried a P7 for years and one of the things I have come to appreciate is how hot the trigger area can become with sustained shooting. In the P7 this is a self-limiting insofar as damage to the gun being caused by excessive heat. The gun just becomes too hot to shoot long before the heat causes any damage because of its steel construction.

The following is some randomized theoretical rambling:

I have some misgivings about the polymer CCP however. The gas cylinder on this gun is going to get hot just like the P7. There will be just as much heat energy that needs to be dissipated as there is in the P7, round for round. However unlike the P7, the shooter’s hand is insulated from the heat by the polymer frame which may encourage the shooter to continue shooting long after the gas cylinder has heated up enough to cause the surrounding polymer to deform under recoil.

Certainly any gun can be shot to destruction but at least the P7 would force it to be a deliberate act…

I’d only add that, despite appearances, the CCP actually has significantly more metal surrounding the gas cylinder than the P7 does. The cast steel block that holds the barrel and gas cylinder is pretty big and the amount of metal around the cylinder “insulating” it from the frame is a lot thicker than on the P7. In the case of the P7, the cylinder is actually in the frame itself and there’s a scant millimeter of metal between the inside of the cylinder and the exterior of the top of the trigger guard area. In this old photo I took you can see how close the cylinder is to the bottom of the frame, which is why it heats up so dang much on the top of the trigger guard area but not nearly as much on the sides of the frame.

The CCP may be able to suck enough heat out of the cylinder and transfer it into the barrel and into the slide for dissipation (as well as directly into the air, as the barrel block has some scalloping in it and when the slide comes back it probably shoots air over it and out the breech) that the polymer can’t get to the point where it’s thinking about deforming. Uncomfortably hot to touch the metal of the P7 might be 130 degrees, but the CCP’s polymer may be able to handle 325 degrees before starting to deform. Might be less, of course… just throwing it out there.

It certainly would be a fun experiment to get a bunch of CCP magazines, load them all up, put a heavy flashlight on the accessory rail, and dump through the mags as quickly as possible to see if you can get the rail and frame to droop eventually 🙂

You forgot about the Truvelo and Wilson Combat ADP’s and Heritage Stealth. All essentially the same design, with a gas piston under the barrel, a barrel concentric recoil spring, and a striker firing mechanism. They all take down in a similar manner to the H&K P7, except there are buttons on both sides of the frame.
Except for design defects, and shoddy quality, to the point where I consider them unsafe, they would have been THE world beater concealed carry gun. They were thin, light, and compact, with a double stack ten round magazine, almost no muzzle flip, and a weird feeling trigger that is actually remarkably smooth and easy to shoot well. I was hoping the Walther was taking this design to the next level. Alas, it was not to be.

The Stealth wasn’t too bad looking. At least it didn’t have that ridiculously shaped grip frame. I’ve come to think of it as a compact, light weight, high capacity, reliable Hi Point with a good trigger. Just don’t carry it with a round in the chamber, inspect the slide for cracks, and, if the striker doesn’t reset, know that double fires are soon to follow.

You mentioned “if the striker doesn’t reset, know that double fires are soon to follow.” about another gun. I know I had a double fire on the CCP and cant remember which ammo it was as I was testing a couple hollow points and fmj. I thought I just squeezed that 3/4″ trigger really fast by accident. You know 3/4″ pull then recoil and 3/4″ reset then another 3/4″ pull. I will be watching out for this more intently now. The CCP that I have has less than 200 rounds shot through it.

With the striker decocked, it’s easier for sure. Super easy. With the striker cocked, it’s about the same. The VP9 doesn’t have much resistance to it plus it has the wings on the rear and those truly do help. So in general that’s a pretty easy-to-rack pistol also for sure. Of course, the VP9 has a significantly better trigger. I’d also guess that, long-term, it’ll outlive the CCP. But it’s also a larger pistol that would be great for really high round count range fun and competition and general enjoyment, whereas the CCP is nice on the range but due to the smaller size and lower capacity it’s really made for concealed carry and self defense so is unlikely to see the same sorts of round counts as a VP9 type gun anyway.

So the sights are not the same as the pps or PPQ. They are the same cut and I guess the front could be interchangeable but they do vary in height. The rear is adjustable by an Allen screw in the CCP and the screw slips into the bottom of the sight much like the retaining clip in the base of the pps rear however they are not interchangeable… I tried… Also the frot sight in the CCP is taller than the front in the PPS. As for the PPQ the rear is held in by a totally different mechanism. I did get a set of XS big dot sights ment for a pps to fit because of the set screw in the rear however due to the difference in front sight height the POI is off. 🙁 the search continues

Sorry if the way I phrased it was misleading. Walther’s advertising material said it in a similar fashion and I think the takeaway is that the sights are not actually identical to the PPS and PPQ sights, but that PPS and PPQ sights will fit on the CCP. So if you want to swap your CCP’s sights out for new ones, you have options. Annoying to hear that the front vs. rear sight height relationship is apparently different and when you put PPQ or other sights on the CCP it moves the POI. Hmm. The CCP did shoot “target sight” style for me, meaning POI was above the front sight. A lot of self defense guns (like most Sigs) have more “combat sight” alignments meaning POI is behind the front sight’s dot. This is what I have become most used to over the past few years. If PPS or PPQ sights made that change on the CCP, my suggestion would be to get used to it as it isn’t bad, it’s only different and it’s a matter of becoming used to where you have to hold.

Did you notice the 1/4″-3/8″ cut/slit midway on the right side of the striker channel as you look down into the slide? Is it intentional and if so…..why? Concern is that it is a milling issue and could lead to damage of the striker sleeve and/or spring over time.

I still don’t know why I would choose this over the PPS? Maybe better ergos? But the PPS feels pretty darn good in hand too. I’m looking forward to shooting the CCP. Just don’t think I have any real reason to buy it unfortunately. It’s going to take a lot for me to replace my SP101 .357 as my primary carry. I’m admittedly a Walther mark thou and own several. So ill probably end up buying it for no reason and sleep on the couch for a few days once my wife sees the bank statement

Well I’m disappointed. I have a PPQ that is easily my favorite polymer 9 so I was hoping the CCP would be the former in miniature, but it sounds like ergonomics are the only shared characteristic. Oh well…

I did not have time to read all the comments but my first thought when I heard about the CCP was why wasn’t it a Hk. I love my P7 but with his steel frame it is heavy for its size. The hand cocker is one of the best manual safeties out there. Hk put together one of the first plastic pistols (VP 70 I believe) and put the trigger guard plastic sleeve in the P7. Apparently the light bulb just did not “click on”.

Thank for your review and especially noting in my mind the shortcomings of the CCP trigger. I had hoped the CCP would have the excellent trigger like the PPQ and I was ready to buy one or two, but no more. The problem with these heavy weight, long pull and long reset triggers is they do not lend themselves to fast and accurate shooting. Which is ironic in the fact that theses guns primary use is for carry where one might be compelled to actually use the handgun for self defense. Additionally, if you shoot other handguns like 1911’s, Glocks, etc. which have excellent triggers allowing fast and accurate shooting, on the CCP you will find yourself pulling against the frame on the second shot due to the full reset. For concealed carry it would appear Walther missed the boat with the CCP as the Walther PPS would be a much better choice for concealment and the PPQ far better for general use. Walther if you are listening, what I would like is a PPS with the ergonomic grip and trigger of the PPQ, throw in the soft recoil, then you would really have a handgun that might make me stop carrying my Sis 938.

I agree completely. Why is it so hard for gun designers to understand we want a small carry gun with a good trigger. If I wanted another gun with great ergonomics, but a heavy, long pull, long reset, crappy trigger I would just shoot my HK P-30. My PPQ 4″ and 5″ have great triggers. I know Walter is capable of making a good trigger, so why did they ruin the CCP?

Trijicon tritium night sights for the p99 are NOT compatible with the CCP. Only the front night sight fits, the factory Walther CCP rear sight has a a screw through it for windage adjustment which is obviously a must have for a “concealed carry pistol.” After reading this article I purchased P99 trijicon night sights for my CCP, in the end I regret buying the p99 night sights, the Walther CCP and reading this misleading article which clearly states.

“They’re compatible in size with the P99, PPQ, and PPS sights so there are already tritium night sights, target sights, and other options available on the market.”

Sorry. Walther’s literature states that they’re compatible. Are you sure you can’t simply drive the new sight into the dovetail? Just because it doesn’t have the same adjustment system doesn’t mean it won’t fit in place of the factory one. Typically adjustments like that are built into the sight itself and have nothing to do with the mounting system (dovetail, in this case).

As fantastic as the PPQ is, the CCP is the drizzling shits. The trigger is just weird. The whole gun in general is just too different from its peers. Far too much brainstorming and thinking outside the box went into this gun. I would easily call it a fail

Your talking bad about this gun and probably have never owned 1Ihave owned mine for about six months now put about 600 rounds through it the gun ran flawless straight out the box no matter what kind of ammo I feed it except +p it says in the manual this gun isn’t really made for it the only 2 things that were wrong with the gun was the trigger and taking the gun apart after putting six hundred rounds through it the trigger feels a million times smoother and after practicing taking this gun apart and putting it back together a bunch of times it becomes real easy whoever looking to purchase this gun don’t hesitate it’s a good pick up at $425 ergonomics are great very reliable

The CCP is a hunk of junk! I own a PPS, P99 and a PPQ all great pistols but the CCP had 3 FTF loss mags 4 X and lost the manual safety. Sent it back to walther and they just charged me $45 because there was too much grease on it? Go figure! Last Walther I will ever buy!

When I saw this in the Rifleman mag was struck by the internal similarities to the P7. I may have to try out one of these. It will have to be very good to approach my P7 but the firing should be interesting.

Good review by Truth About Guns, as always. Although I will take you to task on a few things.

Right off the bat, I own a CCP. Unlike some, the opinions I relate here come from hands on experience. Not from what I read somewhere. Not from Uncle Jacks third cousin. It comes from handling and shooting the gun….more than once.

As I said, I agree with most of the review points, but differ in several key areas.

I’ve read gripes here and a half dozen other places about the need for a tool to field strip the gun. First of all, you don’t need the special tool that comes with the gun. All you need is a small screw driver. Piece of cake once you get used to it. So what is this a big deal? Have we become that lazy? This is a gun designed for concealed carry. Self defense. When I need this gun, I will need it in a hurry, and my life will depend on it. If it malfunctions to the point I need to field strip it, I’m in deep trouble. So the only time I really need to take it down is for routine maintenance. And a collection of small tools is standard in my range bag. If this was a military firearm, that might need to be taken down in a foxhole, at night, miles from nowhere, I could see the issue. But it isn’t. I’m never going to need to field strip it without having small tools handy. So just what is the issue?

Next is the trigger. Yes, it’s long and hard. Well not really. I’ve seen MUCH worse. And yes….it’s squeaky, as you put it. If you pull it real slow. Pull it at normal speed and you don’t notice it. No, you won’t win any IDPA competitions with it. But if that’s what you bought this gun for, you are in for a disappointment. Trust me. In a REAL shooting situation, with your life on the line, it could have a 2 inch, 20 pound pull and you wouldn’t notice it. Time after time I go to the range and see people setting up a silhouette target, pull out their CCW pistol, take a carefully placed proper stance, point their gun, adjust their hands and everything else a half dozen times, take a deep breath, and slowly squeeze the trigger. Then they smile and pat themselves on the back at the nice neat 2 inch groups they shot. If you are one of those, yes, the trigger may bother you. But again, if you think a real life self defense situation is going to come off like that, you are in for a world of hurt.

Now, there are things you can do to improve the trigger pull on the gun, if you absolutely have to. What can I say. I’m a trained, certified gunsmith. I just gotta tinker. And let me make it clear, I do not advocate or encourage ANYONE to modify ANY gun. Anyone who does, does so at their own risk, and should do so only if they have proper training or experience. Having said that, the first this is to do what I call a smooth job. I do it on many of my guns. Especially striker fired. That means tearing the gun apart and polishing every single metal on metal surface. This alone made a big difference, not so much on the pull, but it took out most of the “sqeak”. And secondly, the sear spring on this gun can be replaced with a slightly lighter spring, which makes a noticable difference. The one in the gun could be used in the suspension of a semi rig. Wow, is it heavy.

But again, this is not a competition gun. It’s intended for concealed carry as a DEFENSIVE weapon. Which in my book makes trigger pull a non issue. I’ve yet to encounter a gun that I couldn’t consistently put rounds in center mass on a silhouette target, at a distance and conditions likely to be encountered in a real life situation. And I’ve shot some hard ones. Two inch groups? Nope. But the bad guy’s gonna know he’s been hit. And ins’t that the objective?

In the end, I love this little gun. In size and weight it is very similar to my Ruger SR9c. But it fits my hand a LOT better. It shoots first time, every time, no matter what I load in it. It shoots regular loads, heavy loads, light loads. Hollow points, up to and including big mouth, flying ash trays. It doesn’t care. Function is flawless. And it is more accurate than I am. And strangely enough, I found that with standard 115gr FMJ ammo, Federals in my case, the recoil really wasn’t much different from my SR9c. But put something like 147gr Golden Sabers in it (my normal carry) and it was like shooting a 380. And I even tried some of those hot little ARX Inceptors, with the 74gr polymer/copper bullet that zips downrange at 1500fps and it was like shooting a .22.

Once I get more experience with it, this may take the place of my SR9c as my preferred carry gun. I like it that much.

Before I turn it over to the flamers, I’ll make a few more observations about the gun that I haven’t heard anyone point out yet, anywhere. Which makes me wonder just how much some of these people have actually shot the gun. For one, man does it get dirty. With the inevitable blow by from that piston, the whole inside of the gun is black after a good shooting session. Not a big deal for me. I clean all my guns after every shoot anyway. But expect to go through some rags and q-tips. And the other this is another consequence of that piston. With HOT gas venting into that piston chamber which sits just above the trigger, the bottom half of the frame gets hot in a hurry. After 100 or so rounds it gets quite warm. Not burning hot, but not exactly comfortable either. But again, considering the primary use of the gun, this is another non-issue. Just an observation.

“First of all, you don’t need the special tool that comes with the gun. All you need is a small screw driver. […] I’ll make a few more observations about the gun that I haven’t heard anyone point out yet, anywhere…”

I don’t know, my man, I specifically mentioned that a screwdriver can be used to field strip the gun. Whether it’s easy once you practice it or not, the fact remains that firearm design has long-since purposefully gone away from tools-required field stripping and the CCP’s use of what I think is an entirely optional / unnecessary locking tab, which makes a tool necessary for disassembly, is a step backwards. For the reasons you mentioned it’s not actually a big deal to me but, as stated in the review, it WILL knock the gun out of purchase consideration for many people. The heat soak issue was discussed in the HK P7 Comparison Notes. I actually like a long, heavy trigger pull on a self defense gun (also mentioned in the review), but the halting, stagey, squeaky, spongy nature of the CCP’s trigger is abysmal, and the worst part is that there’s no reset click. No matter what you get the gun for, the fact remains that the trigger is absolutely horrible. Whether it matters during a self defense scenario or not doesn’t mean the truth about the trigger pull gets left out of the review. …After a few hundred rounds of reloads I didn’t really think it was excessively dirty, so it didn’t get a mention. I suppose maybe it was a bit dirtier than usual but it wasn’t enough to be noteworthy.

This is true. But why? What is the purpose you mention? To cater to lazy people? Like I said, this is not a combat weapon. Not in the military sense. I will never need to take this gun down anywhere that I won’t have my range bag at hand. I keep a small tool kit in my range bag. So I have to add one more small tool. Big deal. It’s funny that everyone makes such a big deal about a tool needed for takedown, but they seem to ignore the tool needed to adjust the sights. I have fired this gun numerous times, and have yet to need to do a field takedown. But I have needed to adjust the sights, more than once, with the tool provided, which I keep in my range bag with my other tools.

“the trigger is absolutely horrible”

Absolutely true, when sitting in your living room, under no stress whatsoever, calmly and slowly pulling the trigger. But when I do my shooting drills, I don’t even notice it. Again, what is the gun for? I can repeatedly draw and fire this gun, and put shot after shot into the kill zone of a silhouette target. I can rapid fire, emptying the magazine as fast as possible and put them in the vitals, as well as I can with any other gun I own. What more do you need out of a trigger, or a gun? If you ever find yourself having to shoot the gun in a real life, do or die situation, I somehow doubt that the long squeaky trigger will be amongst the memories you take away from the event.

“and the worst part is that there’s no reset click”

Hmmm. Mine has a distinct and noticeable click. But even if your’s doesn’t, as with the trigger, I’m sure this is an issue when pulling the trigger calmly and slowly in quiet conditions. But are you telling me that in a defensive shooting drill, you are taking the time to listen or feel for a click? Really? I can empty a mag in a hurry. What click? I’ve never encountered a gun yet I even notice it on.

I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen someone on the range bitching about some lousy gun. Bad trigger. Bad grip. Bad this. Bad that. Can’t hit anything with it. I offer to try it and proceed to put a nice patten in center of mass. I find that most who complain about this or that feature on a gun are usually complaining about their own lack of skill, shooting it under realistic conditions. You take a gun, any gun, and you practice and train with it until you learn how to shoot it. Period.

The only questions I ask about a defensive gun are, does it meet my needs from a carry and concealment standpoint? A 1911 government 45 isn’t going to work too well wearing shorts and t-shirt on a hot day. And does it go bang when I pull the trigger? Every time. Regardless of ammo load. That’s it. There’s nothing else about a gun that will prevent me from putting rounds close enough to where they need to be to get the job done.

Now, having said that, are there some guns that are so abysmal that it’s nearly impossible to shoot them accurately? Of course. Like say the FMK 9C with it’s double action trigger pull that comes in somewhere between 20 and 30 pounds. Yep, it’s hard to shoot a gun when you need vice grips to pull the trigger. But guns like that are few and far between. And the CCP isn’t one of them.

It’s specifically a concealed carry defensive use gun. Necessitating a tool to field strip is a total deal breaker for many people. The fact that you have a tool in your range bag means nothing when the purpose of this gun is to be on you when you’re going about your normal business, not when you’re plinking with a bag full of gun related support equipment. The point of a review is to compare one thing to another, and the CCP trigger is way below average. I shot it very accurately as well. But would it be a better gun if it had a better trigger? Heck yes. It isn’t a paper weight or anything haha, but compared to other, similar pistols these are the places where it falls short and that’s the reason reviews like this exist haha.

I’m writing this in response to Jeremy’s last reply, since he apparently locked his post so no one could reply. As I said Jeremy, we obviously disagree on some key points. And that’s totally cool. But what’s with the “haha” you saw fit to sprinkle in your reply. Is it normal for you to laugh at people who reply to your reviews? Why? We are discussing a difference of opinion over certain points about this firearm. And after all, that’s the reason this forum exists…ha ha.

As I said Jeremy, we obviously disagree on some key points. And that’s totally cool. But what’s with the “haha” you saw fit to sprinkle in your reply. Is it normal for you to laugh at people who reply to your reviews? Why? We are discussing a difference of opinion over certain points about this firearm. Issues that are of great importance to people who are considering purchasing one. And you scoff at opposing opinions? We are having a discussion here. That’s the reason this forum exists…ha ha.

Not meant as a scoff at all. It’s hard to infer tone from text so sorry it seemed that way. Of course, I saw in the previous versions of your comment that you thought I had “locked” my comment so people couldn’t reply to it and I’m sure that made it look extra combative and nefarious haha

I just spent some time with one of these at the range. I was quite impressed with the feel and lack of recoil. I do understand what the author is complaining about with the “spongy” trigger, but that actually grew on me. It’s like a two phase pull with the initial spongy part (what I call the “ready, set” stage) and then the second part of the pull where the sponginess goes away and it is just a short quick finish (the “go” stage). I felt that the two phase pull gave me a chance to quickly refine my aim with the sights just before the final pull. I do like the CCP enough that I am going to pick one up this next week.

I will start by saying that I own the ccp, as well as a ppq. My wife carries a pk380, and will not part with it. I own many other handguns, from taurus pt25, to hk usp 45. When I was in Iraq, I carried an m9. I thought the beretta was a fantastic weapon, in that it fit my hand well, and was just plain sexy looking. When I got back stateside, I purchased a taurus 92 ss 17. I outfitted it with a lasermax guiderod laser, hogue grips, and a nice Fobus holster. This was my go to gun…until I handled a ccp. Granted…that is comparing a full size aluminum frame gun, to a compact polymer frame, but my point is that I really loved my taurus. I shot my wife’s pk380, and fell on love with the ergos. I sold my taurus to buy the ccp…and have zero regrets. No issues whatsoever after several hundred rounds. Every time I pick it up, I fall in love with the ergos all over again. I group 2 inch patterns at 45 feet with it consistently. Add a crimson trace rail master 201…and it’s unbeatable as a daily carry. I notice the gritty trigger when sitting around messing with it, but have never even given it a second thought during actual training. Take down is less than 10 seconds after you get the feel of it. It does get dirty though. That’s for sure. My ppq is easier to clean, shoot, and is an all around better weapon…but not for every day carry. Add a streamlight tlr -2 hl on the ppq, and it becomes quite heavy on the belt…but is an absolute delight on the range, and is intimidating to anyone stupid enough to end up on the wrong end of it.

Long and short of it…the ccp is not a junior ppq. It’s not meant to be. I carried an m&p bodyguard 380 crimson trace as my summer gun for a long time, due to its heavy long trigger and positive safety. That is what I require in a carry gun, due to kids in the house and other factors. The ccp was, in my opinion, designed with that so called crappy trigger on purpose. It makes you have to want to pull it, without being overly heavy…like the bodyguard 380, or any glock I’ve ever fired.

In a rifle barrel, vertical stringing is a sign that it’s heated up to point that it’s starting to whip up and down in recoil vs. vibrating/rotating in a circle (cool barrel). My guess is that gases vented from the barrel into the piston are overheating the block and the block is transferring that heat to the barrel. Bad design. Unfortunate. I was definitely interested. Great review though!

I own a CCP for about 4 months now. My example has a fantastic trigger. It keeps improving with use.I would estimate it at about 5 lbs. I regularly take it to the range with my (Early 80’s vintage) P5 . They have about the same felt recoil, the latter by old tech means (mass) and the newer by the “soft coil” technology. The accuracy of my CCP is great also, almost equaling my Full size Walther PPX 9mm SD (Extended threaded barrel) I have run approximately 250 rounds of cheap Tula steel case through the CCP with ZERO failures. I haven’t taken it down to clean it yet (only swabbing the barrel and cleaning the breach face), but that appears to be quite a chore. I am a Walther dealer (FFL) and I have PPS’s in all the time. I had a customer trade a brand new PPS MA (Massachusetts compliant with the 10.5 lb trigger) for a regular PPS and I’ll be damned if I can feel the difference in the two triggers (dry firing with snap caps) If it were up to me to buy a sole (not DB9 small) Sub-compact single stack 9mm for defense and concealed carry- the CCP would be it. Everyone that shoots it, does well with it, even my friend’s 18 year old daughter. It’s easy to rack, very accurate, very reliable- just get some poor sap to clean it for you and you have a clear winner!

This is absolutely the worst trigger Walther has ever made and it ranks right down there with Jiminez and Cobra.

Let me hep you out on how to describe its action (or lack thereof)

Imagine you have a 2 quart mixing bowl in front of you filled with aquarium pebbles. Now, take a #2 pencil (not sharpened) and stick it along the side of the bowl and drag it through the multitude of heavy, gritty, pebbles where somewhere located towards the back of the bowl is where the trigger begins to slow down until it finally breaks in an unknown location.

Conversely, the reset location is a mystery as well because of the lack of any tactile definition. Can you get used to this trigger? Own an aquarium? then, you’re used to cleaning out the fish tank and putting in clean pebbles that you either washed or replaced.

Typically, unusual triggers have an unusual function – or something at a minimum not exactly familiar. The only thing familiar about the CCP trigger was its shape. As far as its delayed blowback design mitigating recoil and muzzle flip, I shot it side-by-side with an XD-9 Mod2 that had less recoil and less muzzle flip than the vaunted H&K ripoff. But it was easier to rack than my Mod2 – but not enough to write home about.

When Ruger comes out with a gun that’s easy to rack and release, now, that would be earth-shaking news.

Ruger is a bit schizophrenic when it comes to naming their guns. Right around the same time that S&W re-introduced their upgraded Sigma series in an effort to ditch the Sigma stigma, they renamed their self-defense guns, dropping the Sigma label, and adding SD (as in Self Defense” or maybe “Something Different”) in 9mm and 40SW and ran with the new SD moniker before getting wind of Ruger’s planned, value leader: a sub-$350 semi, that Sturm & Drang christened the Ruger 9E and was going to be introduced as a $300, 17-round SR9 that would retain enough of the SR9 features to call it a Ruger 9 and add an initial to differentiate it from the pack. “E” could not stand for “Enhanced” since the 9E was the opposite of an “Enhanced” SR9. “Excized” or “Extirpated” made for a better fit.

In any event, the 9E name didn’t stick because it was never meant to stick. It was to shake up the other poly players. And, in that endeavor, it shook up the folks at S&W.

They had succeeded in making Sigma a pejorative for “Stupid triggers.” So after going back to the drawing board (or the cutting room floor of their design department), they decided to improve on the trigger and make some quality adjustments and thoughtfully pass the costs along to the consumer.

Smart move. They were moving in the opposite direction of the Ruger 9E. But, design flaws in the 9E sent the Ruger gunsmiths into a “We told you so” hissy fit, and during the ensuing brouhaha, the 9E vanished out of sight. If you called dealers during this time asking if they had the Ruger 9E, you got some very perplexed responses, like “What? No, we don’t have no stinking 9E’s. What you mean is the Ruger SR9.” Forget about trying to make your case. The 9E’s had been smuggled out of sight during the night so none would notice.

Well, now, S&W saw their chance to jump into the coveted spot of “Best Seller” and “BBFTB” at Academy Sports (“Best Bang For The Buck”). They tacked on two new initials after the “SD” and up popped the “VE” remake. The “VE” was supposed to stand for “Value Enhanced” but whoever thought up that catchy acronym was a tad grammatically challenged.

“Value Enhanced” (VE) is a major “Oxy” “Moron” (OM). They took their awfully gritty trigger and replaced it with a less gritty trigger but retained the mile-long hike to the break point. That was their “safety feature.” You could not fire this gun by accident. Pulling the trigger required the total attention of the user.

I digressed. Getting back to the Walther CCP –

Describing the 110 degree angle of the H&K VP9 in your other review aptly fits the Springfield XD Mod2.The Mod2 is the most naturally pointing gun on the market and it doesn’t cost the GDP of Deutchland to buy it, either.

The CCP was highly anticipated by many after their smashing success with the PPX (now, THERE’S A GREAT TRIGGER) and after Walther had hyped the CCP to death.

BTW, the same delayed blowback system was originally slated to go into the new, striker-fired version of the Ruger LC9 (renamed the LC9s). I don’t know when, but about two years ago, the online teasers were completely scrubbed from the Net – as well as the Net’s cache and archives – so that nobody would ever know they were going to cop Walther’s design.

I don’t know if Walther found out and secretly threatened a lawsuit, or if Ruger couldn’t get their system to work with their double-spring recoil system. I AM going to find the evidence of that belated campaign so that people won’t accuse me of being delusional.

Walther owes potential owners of this gun a huge apology who had held out for it.

Walther doesn’t owe me an apology, and I do not regret in any way purchasing my ccp. As I stated before, the trigger “issue” is slightly noticeable when dry firing or what have you. The trigger does continue to get better with usage. During actual range firing, it is not an “issue” at all, and I guarantee that if I ever have to pull this weapon in a real fire situation, the trigger “issue” will be a non issue. I pull the trigger, ccp go bang. I doubt I will be looking down the slide at a possible attacker and thinking to myself ” man, I can’t shoot this guy with this gritty trigger. I better just throw the gun at him instead.”

It is a fantastic carry weapon. That is what it is designed for. It was never meant to be a trigger snob’s show off weapon, a race gun, or a replacement for your $4000 custom 1911. It is very good at being a very reliable, shockingly accurate, easily concealed, daily carry 9mm. No more, no less.

After reading this review in its entirety and many of the comments I have decided to weigh in. Many of you stated that you were looking into this for your “missus” and as a missus that this gum was bought for I thought I’d clarify some reasons why I chose this gun.

Jeremy you were right in what you said about different guns being made for different people. I don’t have years of experience with weapons and have just recently started going to the range frequently. The only pistol I have shot offten is my husband’s FN 57 and FNS-9. Those are lovely pistols that are so easy to shoot and aim it’s crazy – but way to large for me to have as my own everyday carry gun. As a woman who has never carried a gun with her regularly before safety was definitely a high point of concern for me. On my quest to find a gun I felt comfortable with I shot so many different 9MM concealable weapons I don’t even remember which ones they were. But the manual safety and less sensitive trigger you all hate some much was something that I was actually pretty okay with. Yes, years down the road I may not want a saftey or I may want a lighter trigger but right now this was the gun for me. It’s also really easy for me to handle and manipulate while I’m learning how to have a firm wrist without having a white-knuckle grip.

And – you guessed it – I like it because not only is it ergonomic and safe, but its really pretty as well. Old habits die hard hard – even when buying firearms.

I haven’t shot it much but if you’d like I’ll weigh in more once I’ve gotten it through its “500 round” break in period. Thanks for reading – hope this helps!

Can someone resolve if after market night sights are available for the CCP? Triijicon, TrueGlo, whatever?

Also, after almost a year, I find the basic conclusions about the CCP to be valid as follows:

Great ergos, great look, a bit bigger than some very good competitors, very poor trigger (especially compared to my PPQ), unnecessary complexity in disassembling, gets very dirty inside from extended firing sessions, small, but discernible reduction in recoil. Add very reliable.

I would appreciate any info or intel that suggests Walther is considering an upgrade to correct some of these deficiencies. Jeremy: Nice job on the analysis. Nice job on handling the picky, picky, flamers. At least we don’t see the vulgarity or obscenity noted elsewhere. Keep up your good work. Good discussion from respondents.

We are living in the “golden age” of private gun ownership. Millions of CCW’s, ARs all over, CAD/CAM design and manufacturing making updated models available faster than this old head has ever seen(despite marketing overhang and hype), holster heaven availability, hunting as good as ever its been in my (long)lifetime, super ammo again available at reasonable prices, etc., etc. Silencers–available but costly and slow to obtain.

To my knowledge (and chagrin), there are still no aftermarket options to replace the sights. As the various pics reveal in the article, the stock sight dots are only white in perfect lighting. They are otherwise subdued (nearly black) in what I would characterize as real-world lighting conditions …especially riding on a “CCP” if there is anything in a name.

Like another post mentions, I too was able to pick this gem up for well under $400 on the net …and there is a sound economics 101 reason for that. Until Walther (or someone) can supply visible sights for this heavy and long “CCP” with its abysmal takedown system, it is not likely to draw much consumer demand.

In spite of its thin design, amazing ergonomics and effortless slide manipulation, this gun only appeals to me as a “WRG” — Worthless Range Gun for my wife to shoot until useable sights are available. Its capacity limitations render even that appeal marginal, especially at the same profile dimensions and weight as the higher-capacity G-26 with +2 mag.

Was all set to buy a PPS. The PPS was selling for a ridiculous 380$ around Christmas 2015. (that’s nearly 150 off) After watching a review on the CCP by Hickok I drove to our local Dicks and bought one for 400$. Did see them cheaper online but with shipping and FFL fees it worked out to be about the same. I have a small collection of carry pistols. The Glock 19 is easily the best of the bunch. For me personally, the 19 is to large for daily carry. For whatever reason I was not comfortable trusting my life to any of my single stack 9s, Problem solved. The CCP holds nine rounds, has a long trigger pull, its an absolute tack driver and Walther quality is second to none. Everything in Jeremy S review was spot on. If you are considering purchasing one. I highly recommend Jeremy’s assessment above all the other. “The truth about guns” truly is “The truth about guns!” The Walther CCP, I found my gun! Peace

Man, I was about ready “to pull the trigger on one”, but then I read this!
Seems as if opinions are all over the place!

The P938 Sig was mentioned, now there was a bad trigger!
I say that because an aftermarket trigger and minor work, smoothed it out some.
About as much as I wanted, as a matter of fact, since in a pocket holster, the safety would never stay engaged. But the trigger was heavy enough, never had a problem, just was a little sqeumish.

The CCP, really felt good, but the dealer refused to let me “dry fire” it.
With all the supposed variations in opinions on the trigger, I dont think I will bite, without either dry or actual firing.

Hello all..I have thoroughly read this, and many other CCP reviews. I am a 60 year old female, alone in a rural area, and feel a need to “be prepared” for anything. So..my 2 cents: My gun experience has been with long guns and revolvers. However, I now want a semi auto to carry. I have tried or handled quite a few. I do have some hand/strength problems. My first consideration is a smaller grip. CCP fits the bill. Next consideration..racking the slide. With quite the effort, I managed one or two others, but..I’m not getting any younger, and the CCP is by far..the easiest. The trigger I hear so much about, didn’t appear to be a problem for someone like myself, but I only put one mag through to try it. Perhaps it’s because I am more used to a revolver. Perhaps because I am still learning about semi’s. Being new to semi’s, it seems many of the complaints I am hearing, are some of the things a woman, or new semi owner may be looking for. The take down may be a problem for me..but I think I can probably get someone at the club to assist with this when needed. I found I didn’t care for the sight dots. I prefer the very bright white, that I can see much easier. I wonder if they can be found after market?? Yes, I will practice at the range with whatever gun I get, but after that..It is for self defense. I am open to other suggestions, but my priorities remain as listed above. And I loved the reviews and comments thereafter.

I meant to add, that more gun manufacturers should, if not already, put more effort into some of these things CCP has, including the safety, as more than ever, women are buying guns..and it is no secret that we are built differently, and have different requirements for form, fit and function. Perhaps something like this CCP is the beginning? A smaller frame gun for a smaller hand, makes it a real stretch to rack a slide. Deal-breaker. Even accessories..holsters, etc. Example, a shoulder holster..nice idea, but you will never know how hard it is for a small framed woman to reach across a pair larger boobs 😉 to reach for a gun! Another deal breaker. LOL.

The sight dots are the killer for me. There are no aftermarket options, and this has been very disappointing. Takedown is not impossible to master, and there are a lot of things to like about this pistol, especially if you are a traditional DA shooter. Please do post again if you happen to find those elusive aftermarket sights, because we intend to finally shoot our little closet queen …the moment we can see where it’s aiming…

Good information on this model. Seems an alternative to a number of “similar” purpose guns. Nice to have choices. Not sure how this would be “better” than a M&P 9 compact which is a solid shooter with excellent ergos. Again, choices…

As a noob (and woman) to the whole handgun scene I would like to offer my opinion on the Walther CCP. I really wanted the Glock 43 until I tried it. I liked it but the recoil was rough on my fingers under the trigger. Yes, my husband said move my fingers down slightly and get a better grip on the handle but I like riding high and tight on the handle. The G43 also felt a little more heavy handed to me. I’m don’t know what terms to use to express the feel. So, the G43 was out for me but my husband fell in love with it. So, that was the gun he purchased (more on how it fired in a minute). I also tried the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard .380. Now, my brother-in-law and sister-in-law each own the S&W Bodyguard and love it. It’s small and will fit anywhere pretty much without notice. I tried this handgun and it was not a favorite. Now, keep in mind I don’t have big hands or small hands. I would say they are average for a woman of 5′ 2″. When firing the .380 the recoil made my fingers hit the magazine release each time. My husband said grip tighter – which I tried to do and I still couldn’t keep myself from hitting that button. The slide on top will come back and get your hand if you grip too high on the back of the gun. It got my husband’s and my sister-in-laws. The recoil on the .380 was more noticeable as well – which I was warned about but still wanted to give it a go. Needless to say this gun wasn’t my first or second choice for a conceal carry pistol. So now to the Walther CCP. I read many reviews – the good and bad. I tried this gun and absolutely loved the way it felt. The recoil was light. The gun was not too heavy. Still a good size for concealing. So, I purchased this gun. I took it out to do some target practice and this is what I found. Not all ammo is created equal and not all guns will shoot just anything. I didn’t have a problem at first with the 9mm 115 gr FMJ (can’t remember the brand but it was a cheaper brand). After firing about 35 rounds I started getting “stovepipes” and misfires. I tried a different grain of the same brand ammo – same problem. I then switched to Federal and bingo! I was able to practice again! No problems after that except a dirty gun. I’m not experienced enough to know about the trigger pulls and so forth but for me this is the perfect handgun. For those who are experienced you may not want something that, as my husband says, is “a little squishy” on the trigger. My husband’s Glock 43 did really well. He had no misfires or stovepipes. He likes the way it handles and the trigger pull.

I purchased one of these CCPs and was disappointed right away; quick trip to the range resulted in stove pipes and failures to feed/ eject. I found trigger pull long and gritty; the reset was long as well.
My disappointment was further aplified when I brought this pistol home. Field stripping was a new experience as the slide plug shot out of the slide and landed somewhere in my reloading room. Now I had a paperweight; took a week to acquire a new plug from Walther.
After a long correspondence with a Walther Rep, I sent the pistol in for an evaluation; it came back with a new slide.
This pistol does have some positive features, but they are offset by the negatives. The pistol was accurate and the grip comfortable in my hand. In all the years I have been shooting pistols, this is the only one I dread cleaning.

I have owned a Stainless CCP for a few months now. I like it. The slide does get hot fast and stay hot a long time , but that’s not a deal killer.
Yesterday ( March 6 2016) I had it at the range and the pistol just fell apart on me. The little pistol is right at the 1000 round mark ( all simple FMJ standard pressure factory ammo).
Somewhere around round 20 yesterday the slide locked back.
The slide would not release to move forward . Turning the pistol upside down to look at the bottom of the slide ( while it was in stuck position), I found that small parts had come out of the bottom of the slide and jammed the pistol.
I had never had a problem with this pistol prior to yesterday . I could not fix it and so it is on its way back to Walther to see how their warranty works.
Great little inexpensive 9mm plinker until this happened. I’m glad it was not a self defense pistol and failed while shooting paper targets that don’t shoot back.
When it returns from Walther, it will be traded or sold. I know anything mechanical can fail, but once it does I can’t trust it again.

Walther finally sent me a new pistol to replace the defective one; with less than 50 rounds though the new pistol the slide cracked. So much for the new innovative design! Walther goofed on this one and their reputation will suffer as a result. Worst pistol I have ever owned; I’d throw it in the trash if I could; Walther is getting this turd back.

If you get lucky and get one that doesn’t have any issues. Go on the Walther forums website and read up on the issues thread. Sounds like Walther has ironed out most of the early QC issues, but there are still people having problems with this gun, primarily extreme sensitivity to hollow point ammo, causing FTF, FTE.

Still, among those who like it, it has a loyal following and appears to be accurate and fun to shoot.

This pistol has another problem, one I don’t believe is mentioned here. It is very finicky when it comes to ammo, preferring ONLY the best and — more problematic — it will give constant stovepipes and failures to feed and cock when it gets dirty, after about 8 magazines in one session. I had many other issues, including one frankly dangerous one, but after two trips back to the factory by FedEx and return, this has been addressed and resolved. (Initially, my CCP would chamber a round but fail to cock the striker, leaving its exposed firing pin resting on the primer of a round…unbeknownst to me till I tried to fire the next shot.) Another family member has a CCP and experiences the same stovepipe phenomenon after 50 or 60 rounds. The gun is fun to shoot and quite accurate, but when it comes to defending myself, thank you, but I prefer to carry the SIG P-250 through which I’ve put over 2000 rounds, all kinds of ammo, and never had any failure of any description.

I want to update my review of just 5 days ago. I took the CCP to the range this morning & put 100+ rounds through it, 50 of 124grs & another 50 of 115grs. Let me get to the point quickly: This was the worst experience I’ve ever had with a handgun. Period. EVERY MAGAZINE load but one had major malfunctions, often several within a single magazine. There were stovepipes, failures to go into battery fully, failures to feed, failures to cock the striker both after chambering a round & sometimes without chambering a round, failures to eject, etc. In fact, I had to manually eject ALL 8 expended rounds from one loaded magazine; all 8 failed to eject!

I’ve sent this gun twice back to Arkansas for repair. Once Walther replaced the entire slide, and a second time they replaced all springs but the main slide spring. Notwithstanding those attempts to make it work, the performance of this CCP only seems to decline with time. I’ve suggested to Walther that they “bite the bullet” and offer to take back this gun (manufactured, I learn, not actually by Walther but by Umarex, the air gun people!?!), and give customers credit toward the purchase of some other Walther gun that actually works. The problem with the CCP is in its design & execution; no amount of tinkering will make it better. Anyone even thinking about buying the CCP should think again. Your chances of getting a real lemon like mine are excellent (as a quick perusal of the Walther forum will confirm). Under no circumstances should anyone ever carry it as a defensive weapon. It’s a shame the company seems determined to let its good name be destroyed by this badly constructed and dangerous firearm.

3rd installment on the saga related above. Walther does stand behind its warranty. I sent the CCP back a 3rd time & the company decided to forget any further attempts to repair it. Instead, they sent me an entirely new gun, one that carries a serial number 2000 above the initial gun I bought. Haven’t had time to take the new gun to the range yet.

I bought one and took it to the range… was not impressed. Took it home and disassemble it to clean it and the striker assembly would not stay in the slide; sent it back to Walther. Got it back in record time and took it to the range again. This time the it functioned well but the trigger was horrible, I mean bad! Gritty, spongy and not consistent. Took the gun apart again and saw the issue. The trigger bar rides on a spring that pushes it upward, the mortise the spring sits in is loose and the spring moves side to side thus affecting the trigger pull… I offered it up on Armslist and a guy traded me his Walther P99 QA…

Hm. The more recent negative comments don’t square with our direct experience with ours.
We have a training business and get a lot of women- my partner is both a well-known USPSA shooter and female, which makes the women’s business important- so after being shown a CCP by our Walther rep, we eventually bought one. From, it must be noted, a lady who’d attempted to take hers down and failed in reassembly.
We sent it to Walther for the recall and a new slide hook and since it’s back all is well.
I can’t understand the jamming issues noted above. Ours runs perfectly on both factory FMJ and Federal HSTs, plus my SnS coated-bullet reloads. I can’t even recall a failure to operate ever, even in unsteady students’ hands.
The ergonomics are superior for women based on our extensive use of the gun in our womens’ classes. The slide is indeed the easiest to rack of anything. Even our well-worn M&P Pro, our former “easiest” 9mm is rather harder. This has sold a number of these right there.
Perhaps for a high-volume shooter, in the 500+ rounds per month range, maintenance might get annoying, but few owners of this type of gun shoot that much. Even 50 rounds a month is more than average, and at that rate, this gun needs little maintenance. I pretty much quit doing anything to ours besides a wipedown and a couple of drops of FP-10, and it still runs fine.
The trigger was unimpressive at first, and then broke in very well. Ours is light, smooth, and easy to deal with, especially from anyone who has previously shot a DA revolver. Should a trigger need a break in? Maybe not, but it works great now.
Yes, the takedown system is pretty bad. But apart from that it’s a terrific mid-size handgun for Jane Average, and right there is a valuable thing.

“With your third hand, lift the rear of the slide upwards ….”
OMFG…..ROTFLMAO…. Oh God make it stop!
I’m not old enough for this level of incontinence.
To make it worse, my first thought was “OH! that’s what I’ve been doing wrong! – I gotta use my THIRD hand!”
Probably only CCP owners found this really hilarious.